Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-01-08
Tne Inter-state Commerce Blu.

The Interstate Commerce Bill.
The Whig takes up the cudgels for the
inter. State commerce bill, nov pending In
the tive houses OF Congress, and INDUCES
ir 4 plumber OF affrlnations In regard to II,
but does not let is readers see the bill nor
any part OF It. We quote, therefore, the
only section TO which We have Objected
nsnely, the fourth:
Section 4. That IL shall be unlawful Tor
any common carrier subject 10 the pr0yi-
sioBs Of this act to charge or receive any
greater compensation In the aggregate Tor
the transportation OF passengers or oil IKE
Kind Of property, under substantially sinii-
lar circumstances and conditions, Tor q
shorter thai, for longer distance over the
same line, In the same direction, the shorter
being included within the longer distance;
but this shall not be construed as author
iz,ng any common carrier within the terms
OF this act to charge and receive as great
compensation for a shorter as for longer
distance: Provided, however, that upon
application TO the commission appointed
under the provisions OF this act such CON-
mon carrier may. In special cases, after In
yestigation by the commission, be author
lied 70 charge less for longer than Tor
shorter distances for the transportation OF
passengers or property, and the commls-
sjor NAV from tine to time prescribe the
extent TO which such designated common
carrier may be relieved from the operation
OF this section Of this act.
First, let US say that II the WHO were to
hold us I'D TO It's readers as opposing re.
vision Of the tariff because we oppose Mr..
MoRRIsoN's bill, 1t would not do us greater
injustice than 1t does in representing US AS
being opposed to proper laws regulating
the charges OF common carriers.
The reader Will see upon reading again
the section above quoted that rye have
never said IN regard TO that section word
winch Is not literally true. Congress first
declares that II shall be unlawful TO charge
more for a shorter haul than for longer
haul then, 1t being evident that this pro-
vision would legaize as great charge for
a shorter haul as for longer haul, declares
tina, the provision shall not be construed as
legalizing such charge, thus by its very
terms legalizing any less charge. Does the
Whig hold that there is any virtue in that
declaratiops The provision cannot be con.
strued as legallzing as great charge for
shorter haul as for a longer one; but nell
Their can il be construed as forblddiug 1t.
Itleayts the charge 10 stand upon its merits.
Aud after all this "iingle OF words"
.octsou Roaltx oo,ntntfc atttafda
sbandons the attempt to regulate the
charges OF common carriers, and provides
that the commission provided for else
where In the bill shall have power to "pre-
scribe the extent" to which any common
carrier may be relieved from The operation
Of the said section. Is not this dan.
gerous power 10 in.rust TO commssioni
What Is left of the section after its tail has
tain that not more than one out OF the five
commissioners will be from the South and
II Is hardly in human nature for a northern
commission TO be as ready TO "relieye" a
ration OF the section under consideration.
Again: The section above quoted quail
fies the first provision In it by providing
that common carrier shall not charge as
much fer shorter as for a longer haul
"uEder substantially similar circum.
stances and conditions" Pray, what limit
can be put upon these wordsi What pro-
lection will they afford to shippersS Nay,
what protection can oe expected from q
law which thus turns over to commission
power which belongs only TO Congress
The Legislature Of yirgiaia cannot pass a
valid law touching freights passing from
one State into another, but this commission
can Issue an order Regulating commerce
between the States VA power in express
terms delegated to Congress by the Con-
sIitution
Let us try TO guess bow the new law will
operate. IL Is no answer 10 our objections
TO say that objections totally inconsistent
with them are made by other people. Will
not the natural result be an advance III the
Local freights, The common carriers must
have the money fiom somewhere to enable
them to keep up their roads; and II they
are so hampcred by the new law as thai
they cannot carr, freight loug distances,
they must get this money from shippers
whose freight Is carried short distances.
We beg the Wig to recognize these q
our Positions" whether they are those o
the railroads or not. The Chambers Of
Commerce Of New York, Cincinnati, anC
Richmond have all declared against ths
fourth section. Why didn't the Whis
charge us with holding the "posiiions " o.
those bodiesf Read the following
New Yosg, January 0.-The Chamber o
Commerce to-day adopted long report ap
proving the inter state commerce bili, witt
the exception Of the clause prohibiting
greater charges for toe shorter than th'
longer haul, aud the clause prohibltin.
poolipgs. A committee was appointed 4
urge Congress TO pass the bali WITH thes
amendments. Chauacey Nj. Depew aut
the other railrosd.men who were asked Il
attend the meeting did nol do so.
The railroad-men were not at the meet
iex. II was tue businessmen OF Mes
YORK who thus passed upon the bill. The
object to two sections. We have objecte
TO only one out OF tie twenty.four. Pei
hs3s, therefore. the Wig viii DO US To
Justice TO state that we have expressed ouI
selves as iayofIng proper legislation, an
cordially and fully endorsed what the Sta
has said upon ibis point. II Is surely nc
impossible 70 pass a proper bill. We es
ptct that this bin will 10 hurried thrcug
both houses at the present session Of Cor
gfess, and that n II IL signed by the Pros
dent and becomes law, the law will B
repealed next winter. or 30 modified as
d,yest Il Of It's Questionable features. w
doubt that the President will sign II.